Charge: Hillary camp fears new ‘bimbo eruption’

Hillary Clinton watches as President Clinton discusses the Monica Lewinsky scandal at the White House in January 1998.

Kathleen Willey, one of the women who reports being sexually harassed by Bill Clinton during his time in the White House, as WND reported earlier, has launched an anti-Hillary Clinton website called “A Scandal A Day.”

And a popular progressive icon, Camille Paglia, is comparing the escapades of Clinton, the husband Hillary, a possible Democratic candidate for president in 2016, to Bill Cosby, who has been accused by dozens of women of being a sexual predator and rapist.

Now the controversy has gone global, with the Daily Mail in the United Kingdom charging that Hillary Clinton’s campaign “fears a new ‘bimbo eruption’ will put the kibosh on candidacy.”

The big circulation UK publication noted the women from Bill Clinton’s past all have been making statements recently, including Paula Jones who “slammed Hillary saying she ‘lied’ about sexual scandals,” Linda Tripp who “told Daily Mail Online Hillary ruthlessly destroyed the credibility of the women who came forward during Bill’s presidency,” and Gennifer Flowers, who “revealed Bill used to fantasize about having sex with his lover in a story window.”

“Fears are growing among Hillary Clinton’s advisers that Bill’s sordid past is returning to thwart his wife’s presidential campaign,” Laura Collins wrote for the Mail. “With her presidential bid the couple’s relationship is the subject of renewed scrutiny bringing with it the threat of a second ‘eruption of bimbos’ akin to the one that almost derailed Bill’s own presidential bid first time round.”

Get the whole story on how sexual harassment at the hands of Bill Clinton turned into bullying at the hands of the Clinton administration in Willey’s book “Target: Caught in the Crosshairs of Bill and Hillary Clinton.”

The report explained:

• Paula Jones said Hillary Clinton should be disqualified from her Oval Office big because of her “lies” about the then-president’s sexual sandals.
• Linda Tripp, who outed Monica Lewinsky’s affair, told the Mail Hillary Clinton is forever tainted by “scandal and wrongdoing.” “She revealed how Hillary stage-managed and orchestrated the ‘bimbo eruptions,’ ruthlessly destroying the credibility of the women who came forward,” the Mail said.
• Lucianne Goldberg, an agent who worked with several women claiming relations with Bill Clinton, said the problem has returned. “It’s back,” he told the news organization. “I think it’s something they’ve always been worried about.”
• Author Ronald Kessler, who has released a book about the Clintons, said, according to the Mail, “There’s no question that more will be coming out about Bill Clinton’s sexual antics as the campaign heats up.”
• And as WND reported, Willey is seeking contact with women who may have been assaulted by the former president.
• Finally, Gennifer Flowers, the Mail said, “may be next to divulge more damaging secrets of her time with the former president.”

WND reported just days ago on the verdict from Paglia.

In an interview with Salon, Paglia noted Cosby has been accused by dozens of women of using drugs to sedate and then sexually assault them. And then there’s the other B.C.: Bill Clinton.

“The actual facts of the matter are that Bill Clinton was a serial abuser of working-class women – he had exploited that power differential even in Arkansas,” she said in the interview with Salon writer David Daley.

Daley noted the recent WND story featured by the Drudge Report reporting Willey, one of the many women who alleged harassment by Clinton, was beginning a website to compile claims against him.

WND’s report explained her website, “A Scandal A Day,” targets Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.

Calling Hillary Clinton “without a doubt the most corrupt politician that this nation has ever seen,” Willey announced the launch of her new website on “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio,” broadcast on New York’s AM 970 The Answer and Philadelphia’s NewsTalk 990 AM.

Get the whole story on how sexual harassment at the hands of Bill Clinton turned into bullying at the hands of the Clinton administration in Willey’s book “Target: Caught in the Crosshairs of Bill and Hillary Clinton.”

Willey, the former volunteer aide to Bill Clinton who says she was sexually harassed by the president in the White House, explained the website is part information-oriented and part political activism.

“The Clintons have made it extremely easy for me,” she said in the radio interview. “I don’t have to do a lot of research, because it’s not just a scandal a day. It’s about two or three scandals a day. So what I’m doing is kind of a compilation of these scandals and explaining them in simple terms so most people can understand what’s going on, and what they’re up to and why they are lying every day.”

Listen to Klein’s interview with Willey:

Paglia said she knew the Cosby scandal would hurt Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

“Young women today have a much lower threshold for tolerance of these matters,” she said. “The horrible truth is that the feminist establishment in the U.S., led by Gloria Steinem, did in fact apply a double standard to Bill Clinton’s behavior because he was a Democrat … [and] supported abortion rights.”

It’s different now, she said.

“Young women have absolutely no memory of Bill Clinton. It’s like ancient history for them; there’s no reservoir of accumulated good will.”

Not that an affair by a president would upset her, she said.

“That doesn’t bother me at all. But the point is, they are sophisticated affairs that the European politicians have, while the Clinton episode was a disgrace,” she said.

Now Hillary Clinton will have a price to pay, too, Paglia said, since “she took an antagonistic and demeaning position toward her husband’s accusers.”

Willey said that while she was writing her 2007 book, “Target: Caught in the Crosshairs of Bill and Hillary Clinton,” she was anonymously contacted by other women who claimed to have been sexually assaulted by Bill Clinton.

She told Klein the women who called her “were afraid to talk to me because they were afraid my phone was being tapped.”

“They didn’t give me their names. They gave me incidences, time, places, where things happened and what happened.”

She continued: “And frankly I was pretty horrified by some of the things they told me. And they were scared to death of Hillary Clinton. And I don’t blame them.”

 

from PropagandaGuard https://propagandaguard.wordpress.com/2015/08/01/charge-hillary-camp-fears-new-bimbo-eruption/

from WordPress https://toddmsiebert.wordpress.com/2015/07/31/charge-hillary-camp-fears-new-bimbo-eruption/

Cruz: Abortion videos are game-changers

Dr. Deborah Nucatola, Planned Parenthood’s senior director of medical services, discusses selling baby parts during a lunch

(Editor’s note: This is part two of a four-part interview with Republican presidential candidate Sen. Ted Cruz. Read Part one: Cruz fires back at Romney: ‘This is why we keep losing’)

WASHINGTON – Are the Planned Parenthood videos a game-changer or a turning point?

“Absolutely,” somberly confirmed Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas.

“The Planned Parenthood videos are gruesome.”

He paused, as if to look for just the right word.

“They’re horrifying.”

It was unlike any encounter WND had ever had with the fiery Texan, who routinely scores his rapid-fire points with vigorous animation and a dazzling intellect.

During a half-hour phone interview, Cruz was extremely deliberate, spoke very slowly, and measured his words with such care one could practically hear him thinking during numerous pauses to reflect.

That was true of the entire interview, but seemed especially pronounced while he discussed this most delicate and important of subjects: an accusation of infanticide for profit.

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas

“I believe every American should watch those videos,” Cruz told WND in hushed tones.

Why?

Because, he said, “The question every American should ask is, ‘Are those my values?’”

“Even if you are an abortion supporter, watching those videos is horrifying.”

The Center for Medical Progress recently released four videos, and promises eight more, of Planned Parenthood officials discussing selling aborted baby body parts. The most recent video included graphic pictures of dissected limbs and organs. Those videos may be seen here.

Selling body parts for profit is illegal. Planned Parenthood insists it is reimbursed only to cover expenses, but its officials have been caught on tape negotiating sale prices. One official bragged she would like to make enough profit off dead baby parts to buy an Italian sports car.

Cruz is so horrified by the videos he may risk another government shutdown to try to get the mainstream media to at least begin covering the story, and to try to eliminate the $528 million the government gives to Planned Parenthood every year.

The Texan expressed sheer disbelief at videos that “show senior officials of Planned Parenthood laughing, swilling Chardonnay, while bartering and selling the body parts of unborn children.”

The presidential candidate recalled how earlier in the week he had called for reporters to ask Hillary Clinton if those were her values, and if they were reflected in senior officials of Planned Parenthood selling the body parts of unborn children, caught on tape apparently committing multiple felonies.

“I was pleased to see that reporters followed through and asked her those questions. And even Hillary Clinton was forced to say the videos were disturbing.”

Democratic presidential candidate Sec. Hillary Clinton

“Well, as the adage goes, talk is cheap,” Cruz dryly observed. “If the videos are disturbing, then Secretary Clinton should return every penny she has received from Planned Parenthood over the years.

“And she should demonstrate the integrity to call for a fair and impartial criminal investigation into whether each of these Planned Parenthood officials, and Planned Parenthood as a national enterprise, committed multiple felonies which carry significant jail terms.”

Clinton told the New Hampshire Union Leader Tuesday she had seen the pictures “and obviously find them disturbing.”

She then immediately defended her longtime ally, saying, “Planned Parenthood for more than a century has done a lot of really good work for women: cancer screenings, family planning, all kinds of health services.”

But the Democratic Party presidential front-runner then may have swung the door wide open for an investigation into the entire abortion industry by adding, “[T]his raises not questions about Planned Parenthood so much as it raises questions about the whole process, that is, not just involving Planned Parenthood, but many institutions in our country.”

Clinton likely stunned fellow pro-abortionists by continuing, “And if there’s going to be any kind of congressional inquiry, it should look at everything and not just one part of it.”

Most stunned of all may be Planned Parenthood, which had given her a 100 percent rating for her Senate voting record and donated $8,000 to her 2000 campaign and $1,837 to her presidential campaign in 2008.

Planned Parenthood is a member of Hillary’s foundation, the Clinton Global Initiative, and trains “youth peer providers” on ways to promote birth control in Latin America, Africa and the United States.

Politico reported Thursday, according to the Clinton foundation website, Planned Parenthood will “create a national youth organizing strategy to help push for increased investment in access to reproductive health care.”

In other words, the Clinton foundation will help Planned Parenthood organize young people to push for more money for the abortion provider.

Cruz told WND, “If Secretary Clinton was speaking the truth when she said the videos of Planned Parenthood were disturbing, then she should join with me in calling for Congress to stop spending taxpayer money funding an entity that sells the body parts of unborn children, laughs about it, and whose senior officials hope they can sell enough body parts to purchase a Lamborghini.”

It looks like the senator and a growing number of his colleagues are willing to risk another government shutdown to stop federal funding of Planned Parenthood.

Republican senators have introduced a bill to defund the abortion provider, but the consensus on Capitol Hill is that the measure will never get the 60 votes needed to overcome a potential Democratic filibuster, at least not with the mainstream media’s near total-blackout of coverage on the video story.

“We do not need a legislative show-vote,” Cruz told the Dallas Morning News on Wednesday. “I would support any and all legislative efforts to defund Planned Parenthood.”

Cruz and fellow conservatives including Sens. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., and James Lankford, R-Okla., are considering attaching an amendment defunding Planned Parenthood to “must-pass” legislation, such as the spending bill that must be passed by October to keep the government funded.

Republicans were unsuccessful in attempting to defund Obamacare in 2013 when Democrats, instead, allowed the government to shut down and the GOP took the blame in the media.

Conservatives hope this time could be different, with such emotion fueling the debate.

“Hard to imagine a Republican-controlled Congress voting to continue federal funding of Planned Parenthood in September,” said Dan Holler, a spokesman for Heritage Action.

“When people are using illegal abortion procedures, that’s something that most people find barbaric and that’s something that most people don’t want funded by their taxpayer dollars,” said David Daleiden, head of Center for Medical Progress, which is releasing the videos.

Follow Garth Kant @DCgarth

Related stories:

Senate showdown to defund Planned Parenthood

Cruz: Abortion videos are game-changers

Congresswoman compares abortion to heart surgery

2nd abortion group wants comments to undercover activists suppressed

from PropagandaGuard https://propagandaguard.wordpress.com/2015/08/01/cruz-abortion-videos-are-game-changers/

from WordPress https://toddmsiebert.wordpress.com/2015/07/31/cruz-abortion-videos-are-game-changers/

Sanders 1 of 69 Democrat socialists in Congress

In a televised moment that could haunt the Democratic Party for years to come, the chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee awkwardly struggled to answer and then ducked a question from MSNBC about the difference between a socialist and a Democrat.

The exchange occurred when “Hardball” host Chris Matthews asked Debbie Wasserman Schultz about the presidential campaign of Sen. Bernie Sanders, a self-described socialist who is running for president as a Democrat.

While Sanders has not been shy about his affinity for socialism, the exchange between Schultz and Matthews may betray a relationship the Democratic Party has taken great pains to hide.

The forgotten history revolves around the central role played by the Democratic Socialists of America, or DSA, in founding the Congressional Progressive Caucus, or CPC, the largest membership organization within the Democratic Caucus of Congress, currently with 69 declared members.

What do YOU think? Is there a difference between Democrats and socialists? Sound off in today’s WND poll

The DSA is the largest socialist organization in the United States and is the principal U.S. affiliate of Socialist International, the worldwide organization of social democratic, socialist and labor parties.

The CPC is currently co-chaired by Reps. Raúl Grijalva, D-Ariz., and Keith Ellison, D-Minn. It was founded in 1991 by six member of Congress, including Sanders and Reps. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., Maxine Waters, D-Calif., and Ron Dellums, D-Calif.

An early CPC member was Nancy Pelosi.

The Democratic Socialists of America’s chief organizing goal has been to work within the Democratic Party and remove the stigma attached to “socialism” in the eyes of most Americans.

“Stress our Democratic Party strategy and electoral work,” explains an organizing document of the DSA. “The Democratic Party is something the public understands, and association with it takes the edge off. Stressing our Democratic Party work will establish some distance from the radical subculture and help integrate you to the milieu of the young liberals.”

An online definition of socialism calls it “any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods.”

It also is described as “a stage in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism.”

Tongue-tied DNC chief suffers socialist stutter on MSNBC

As WND reported Friday, Matthew asked Wasserman Schultz, “What is the difference between a Democrat and a socialist?”

Wasserman Schultz was unwilling to offer an answer, only saying that the bigger issue is the difference between a Democrat and a Republican.

Read Stanley Kurtz’ “Radical-In-Chief: Barack Obama and the Untold Story of American Socialism” about our current Democrat president.

Matthews had first asked, “Do you want to see Bernie Sanders speak at the Democrat National Convention? Do you want to have him up there as a socialist representing the Democratic Party?”

“Bernie Sanders has been a good Democrat. He caucuses with the Democrats. Of course he should speak,” she said.

When Matthews presses about whether the speech should be in prime time or when nobody is listening, she waffled.

“I don’t know what time he should speak,” she said. “The progressive populist message that he has that resonates deeply and widely with the American people, not just with Democrats, absolutely should be featured,” she said.

Matthews left her struggling for words. He asked: “What is the difference between a Democrat and a socialist? I used to think there was a big difference. What do you think it is?”

Wasserman Schultz laughed nervously. Then she moved on to “uhm.”

“The difference between … the real question is what’s the difference between being a Democrat and being a Republican,” she finally explains.

Matthews pressed for an answer: “You’re the chairman of the Democratic Party. Tell me the difference between you and a socialist.”

“The relevant debate that we’ll be having over the course of this campaign is the difference between a Democrat and a Republican,” she insisted.

See the exchange:

WND left messages for both Schultz and Mathews, requesting comment on the exchange. Neither responded.

Socialists hosted CPC website

The DSA openly helped to establish and found the CPC.

In 1998, the January/February issue of Chicago DSA’s New Ground publication identified Sanders and Democratic Rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts as leaders of the Progressive Caucus in Congress, which, the publication related, the DSA “helped to organize.”

Until November 2002, the website of the CPC was openly hosted by the DSA, demonstrating the close ties between the two likeminded groups.

Following negative publicity about the CPC website being hosted by the socialist organization, the list of CPC names was moved to Sanders’ own website and was later relocated to its own site.

WND reported as early as 1998 on the DSA and the progressive congressional faction. WND reported at the time the DSA website featured “The Internationale,” the worldwide anthem of communism and socialism.

Another song on the site was “Red Revolution,” sung to the tune of “Red Robin.” The lyrics include:

“When the Red Revolution brings its solution along, along, there’ll be no more lootin’ when we start shootin’ that Wall Street throng. …”

Also:

“Are you sleeping? Are you sleeping? Bourgeoisie, Bourgeoisie. And when the revolution comes, We’ll kill you all with knives and guns, Bourgeoisie, Bourgeoisie.”

The issue of the CPC being hosted on the DSA website rose again in June 2000 in connection with a heated dispute on the House floor among Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham, R-Calif.; Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore.; and David R. Obey, D-Wis., over the “merits of the F-22 fighter plane.”

When Cunningham stood to defend himself, he included in his argument the fact the DSA website had a link to the CPC, which DeFazio then led.

In 2000, the relationship between the CPC and DSA was an open secret.

In an Aug. 10, 2000, letter to the editor published in the Kentucky Post, it was reported that then-Democrat Rep. Ken Lucas had received campaign funds from Democrat Reps. Marcy Kaptur, John Lewis, George Miller, Nancy Pelosi and Charles Rangel, “among others on the far-left.”

The writer remarked that “those five names stand out because they are all members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus – a group closely aligned with the Democratic Socialists of America.”

The CPC still had not moved to its own website on April 23, 2002. Author and political philosopher Balint Vazsonyi responded thusly in the Washington Times to the hypothetical question: “‘What?’ I hear you say. ‘Socialists in the Congress of the United States?’”

Dozens, dear reader, dozens. And they make no secret of it. Although of late it has been refurbished and the address altered, they have their own Web site. They call themselves members of the Progressive Caucus, until recently an arm of the Democratic Socialists of America, itself an arm of the Socialist International. The Progressive Caucus may be a separate entity now, but the details of its program, as advertised on the website, are indistinguishable from that of the Socialist International.

To their credit, they make no secret of it. Only the rest of us prefer not to believe it.

In a follow-up article in November 2002, Vazsonyi dug deeper into the continued presence of the CPC on the DSA website. He discussed the issue of constitutionality and the ramifications of the relationship:

The Socialist International carries the torch for Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, V.I. Lenin, Leon Trotsky, and Josef Stalin. Pay no attention to the desperate attempts by socialists to distance themselves from Stalin. For our purposes, it suffices to observe that every single tenet of the Socialist International is the exact opposite of the principles upon which America was founded, and which define the U.S. Constitution.

For our purposes, it suffices also to observe that members of the U.S. Congress are required to furnish an oath whereby they will preserve, protect, and defend said Constitution.

Sanders recruited socialists to Congress

In divining the early DSA-CPC ties, it is instructive to review the case of CPC co-founder Sanders.

In fact, the ties between Sanders and the DSA go back to at least 1988 and continued openly until recently, WND has found.

On Oct. 24, 1988, The Nation magazine, identifying Sanders as “the socialist Mayor of Burlington, Vermont,” reported he had been endorsed for Congress by both the Democratic Socialists of America and the progressive founders of Ben and Jerry’s Ice Cream.

The DSA endorsed Sanders for every one of his subsequent elections and has openly helped to raise funds for him over the years.

In 2006, for example, the DSA boasted in its literature about the socialist group’s “involvement in Bernie Sanders’ pivotal independent 2006 Senate campaign in Vermont.”

Indeed, the DSA held “Elect Sanders” house parties in Atlanta; Boston; Detroit; Portland, Maine; Boulder, Colorado; Indianapolis; Columbus, Ohio; Ithaca, New York; Springfield, Massachusetts; Washington, D.C.; and New York City.

“DSAers wanting to hold Sanders house parties should contact me at fllewellyn@dsausa.org,” wrote one senior DSA activist in the socialist group’s July 2006 newsletter.

That same year, Sanders spoke at a Detroit fundraiser for DSA’s Political Action Committee. The fundraiser was connected by telephone link to a simultaneous DSA fundraising event in Atlanta.

DSA literature notes that in January 2006, DSA Detroit Chair David Green “took Bernie Sanders to tour Stan Ovshinsky’s United Solar Ovonics plant in Auburn Hills northwest of Detroit.”

“The plant makes successful, cost-efficient solar panels and is pioneering the hydrogen fuel cell,” added the DSA.

In the fall of 2006, Sanders was the featured speaker at several DSA “urban parties” also meant to garner support for his senatorial run while raising awareness about the DSA and recruiting new members to the group.

One New York City event was held Sept. 19, 2006, at the home of DSA activists Gene and Laurel Eisner on Manhattan’s Upper West Side.

“The questions and comments actually had to be cut off to let Bernie get to the plane,” reported the DSA.

DSA reported the Sanders events helped to recruit new members to the socialist organization.

“Sanders support work provides a natural vehicle in any locality for DSA to reach out to – and potentially recruit – unaffiliated socialists and independent radicals.”

Sanders is not the only former CPC member openly affiliated with the DSA.

WND reported in 2010 former Ohio Congresswoman Mary Jo Kilroy was listed in DSA literature as a member of the U.S.-based socialist organization.

Obama connected to socialist group

Top Democratic Socialists of America members have been closely linked for years to Obama.

Obama himself spoke at a forum organized by the group at the University of Chicago in early 1996 called “Employment and Survival in Urban America,” WND previously found.

Quentin Young, considered the father of the U.S. single-payer health-care movement, is a longtime Democratic Socialists of America activist. Young has had a relationship with Obama, particularly in the 1990s, when he reportedly advised Obama on health care.

Young was reportedly present at a 1995 meeting at the home of former Weather Underground terrorist William Ayers, who was said to have launched Obama’s political career.

Young has been active in Chicago socialist circles and was previously accused of membership in a communist group. In 1992, Chicago’s branch of the Democratic Socialists of America awarded Young, a member, with their highest honor – the Debs Award.

In a 2008 article in the official Communist Party USA magazine, Young noted Obama previously expressed support for a single-payer universal health-care program, although he later waffled when asked about his position.

As an Illinois state senator representing a mostly black district on the South Side of Chicago, Obama publicly supported universal health care. He also co-sponsored the Bernardin Amendment, which did not pass but would have amended the Illinois State Constitution to add health care to the list of basic rights for residents.

Meanwhile, Obama spoke at the March 29, 1998, memorial service for Chicago Democratic Socialists of America member Saul Mendelson, DSA literature documented.

Timuel Black, a member activist, mediated political disputes on behalf of Obama in the 1990s and was reportedly involved in Obama’s campaign committee during his successful 2004 Senate race.

Longtime member activist Arnold Wolf was a member of “Rabbis for Obama” and has held fundraisers in his home for Obama, including a function in 1995 that was aimed at introducing Obama to the Hyde Park activist community.

Eliseo Medina, international executive vice president of the Service Employees International Union, has been honored by Democratic Socialists of America. During the most recent presidential campaign, Medina served on Obama’s National Latino Advisory Council.

WND reported Medina, speaking at a 2009 Washington, D.C., conference, declared granting citizenship to millions of illegal aliens would expand the progressive electorate and help ensure a progressive governing coalition for the long term.

Related story:

Tongue-tied DNC chief suffers meltdown on MSNBC

from PropagandaGuard https://propagandaguard.wordpress.com/2015/08/01/sanders-1-of-69-democrat-socialists-in-congress/

from WordPress https://toddmsiebert.wordpress.com/2015/07/31/sanders-1-of-69-democrat-socialists-in-congress/

Bill launched to halt refugee resettlement

Somali community in Lewiston, Maine, one of many cities and towns where the U.S. State Department, working with the U.N., has sent large contingents of refugees.

A Texas congressman has introduced legislation that would halt the resettlement of United Nations-certified refugees in the U.S. pending a full study on the program’s impact on the nation’s economy and national security.

Rep. Brian Babin, R-Texas, introduced the Resettlement Accountability National Security Act  or HR 3314, which places an “immediate suspension on allowing immigrants into the United States under the refugee resettlement program, until the Government Accountability Office (GAO) completes a thorough examination of its costs on federal, state and local governments.”

According to the U.S. government data, nearly 500,000 new immigrants have come to the U.S. under the resettlement program since President Obama took office – with the state of Texas and its taxpayers taking in more than any other state.

Since 2002, a total of 69,490 refugees from more than a dozen countries have been resettled in Texas. That does not include “secondary migration,” which involves refugees moving into Texas after first being resettled elsewhere.

Texas, California lead the way

The Lone Star State absorbed 7,214 refugees in fiscal 2014, followed by California with 6,108 and New York with 4,082. Michigan received 4,006 refugees and Florida 3,519 to round out the top five. Minnesota, when secondary migration is included, also makes the top five with more than 4,000 refugees arriving every year.

The refugees pour in from Iraq, Somalia, Burma, Bhutan, Cuba, Afghanistan and even Iran and Syria.

And it’s not only major urban centers receiving refugees. Cities like Amarillo, Texas, Manchester, New Hampshire, Twin Falls, Idaho, Lewiston, Maine, Wichita, Kansas, and St. Cloud, Minnesota, have been slammed with refugees from the Third World over the past decade. Most arrive with no English or job skills and the nine major resettlement agencies that get government cash to do the resettlement work typically only provide aid for three to five months – after that the refugees are mainly the responsibility of state and local governments.

Almost all of America’s refugees are selected by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees Antonio Guterres.

After they are assigned to the U.S., the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI are responsible for screening them for connections to foreign terrorist organizations. FBI Counter-terrorism Deputy Director Michael Steinbach testified before Congress in February that it is impossible to screen refugees from a “failed state” like Syria, where the U.S. has no boots on the ground and no access to reliable law enforcement data. Somalia has similarly devolved into chaos.

‘Economic and social costs’ wearing on communities

“It is extremely unsettling that the Obama Administration would continue to expand the U.S. resettlement program at such an irresponsible pace in light of our economic and national security challenges,” said Babin in a statement on his website. “While this program may be warranted in certain situations, it is continuing at an unchecked pace. For the past decade the U.S. has been admitting roughly 70,000 new refugees a year, with little understanding of the economic and social costs on our communities.”

Rep. Brian Babin, R-Texas, is a freshman congressman who represents the nine counties, including part of Harris County outside Houston.

The costs of the resettlement program have ballooned to $1 billion a year, according to the State Department’s website, and that only covers the costs of grants used to administer the program. The $1 billion figure does not include the cost of social welfare programs that refugees immediately qualify for upon entry into the country. And, as some elected officials have cited, many of the costs to state and local governments are not fully funded by the federal government.

“Our legislation institutes a common sense pause in the program so that we can better understand the long-term and short-term costs that this program has on local governments, states and U.S. taxpayers,” Babin said. “It also gives us an opportunity to examine potential national security issues related to entry and resettlement, particularly as federal law enforcement officials are increasingly concerned about home-grown terrorists.”

Resistance growing in South Carolina, Idaho, Minnesota

A public backlash against the refugee resettlement program has sprung up in recent months in several communities, including Spartanburg, South Carolina, Twin Falls, Idaho, and St. Cloud, Minnesota.

The refugee resettlement industry, which includes legions of immigrant rights advocates, lawyers, and community organizing groups funded by George Soros, the Rockefeller and Ford foundations, among others, churned out a document in 2013 on how to deal with so-called “pockets of resistance.”

The document, authored by the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, one of the nine government contractors doing resettlement work, advised refugee advocates to research the backgrounds of local people who oppose resettlements and turn them over to the Southern Poverty Law Center for public shaming as “racists” and “anti-Muslim” bigots.

This strategy has already been employed to varying extents in Spartanburg, St. Cloud and Twin Falls as residents have become organized and started demanding answers about how many refugees will be arriving, from what countries, and what the social and economic impact will be on school systems, job markets, healthcare and housing.

Shutting down First Amendment rights of resisters

In St. Cloud earlier this week, a speaker, Ron Brantsner, was scheduled to address refugees and their economic impact at a local VFW hall. Brantsner, a former Minnesota resident now living in California, spoke on the same topic earlier in Little Falls, Minnesota, attended by about 100 people. He has worked in the past with the Minutemen along the U.S.-Mexican border, and that was enough to get him branded a “racist” by a local union organizer in St. Cloud.

Jane Conrad, who has worked to organize home healthcare workers for the Service Employees International Union, found out about Brantsner’s speaking engagement and announced a rally would be held Saturday, Aug. 1, on the court house square in St. Cloud, denouncing the “racists” who dared to listen to a speaker with whom she disagreed.

The VFW canceled the event at the last minute, but some local residents showed up anyway and were told by VFW staff they were welcome to come in and have dinner. A state legislator and a uniformed police officer were present, as was a friend of Conrad, the union organizer. A local resident, Bob Enos, reportedly stood up and gave a few words, described as a “pep talk,” by those in attendance, about the progress made in resisting the resettlement program on economic grounds. The union rep reported back to Conrad, who also got a professor at St. Cloud State University to send out an email denouncing the residents as guilty of bigotry.

Jane Conrad is a union organizer in St. Cloud, Minnesota.

Now, Conrad has again called for a protest rally at 12 noon Saturday at the County Courthouse in St. Cloud. The residents concerned about the growing refugee population overburdening their town are not backing down. They are organizing their own event and serving BBQ at the VFW Saturday. A large biker group has reportedly said it will make a showing.

“Anyone who shows the least resistance to refugee resettlement has to expect this type of aggressive agitation from the left,” said Ann Corcoran, author of Refugee Resettlement Watch and an activist who helped stop refugee resettlement in her town of Hagerstown, Maryland, about eight years ago. “You have to organize your own forces to confront the agitators and show them you won’t back down. In St. Cloud, Jane Conrad was stirring up the racial unrest, going to the Somalis and stirring them up. Our people were not the ones bringing race into the discussion.”

Branding veterans as ‘racist’

Keishia Buckentine, manager of the VFW Post 428 in St. Cloud, was present at the meeting and heard the short talk by Enos. She said he made no mention of race.

“They are accusing us of being supporters of racism, which we are not,” Buckentine told the St. Cloud Times. “I find it disgusting they would treat a group of veterans like this.”

But Corcoran is not surprised.

“This kind of trashing of the First Amendment rights of average American citizens who speak out or even question the refugee program is right out of the playbook of the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society’s document,” Corcoran said. “St. Cloud residents have vowed not to bend to what they see as discrimination and intolerance against opposing views.”

The city of St. Cloud – in the heart of former Rep. Michele Bachmann’s district – has been swamped in recent years by Third World refugees sent by the U.S. State Department Refugee working in concert with the United Nations and its resettlement agencies, which includes Catholic Charities and Lutheran Social Services.

Bachmann said the refugee resettlement program has become something it was never intended to be — a steady stream of Third World population transfers to American cities and towns.

“What began as a heartfelt, caring response to a jihadist-created humanitarian crisis has morphed into an expansion of Third World immigration at U.S. taxpayer expense,” she told WND. “We now know the U.N. and U.S. State Department unilaterally foist large numbers of unvetted persons onto local communities. The state and local taxpayers, in addition to federal taxpayers pick up the tab, without the local communities consent.

“Destabilizing local communities often follows with concerned citizens wrongly smeared and demonized by community organizers who actively work to increase the number of immigrants.”

Former Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn.

Corcoran also notes the irony that a union organizer would be leading the protest in Minnesota against those seeking to turn off the refugee spigot.

“We believe that Lutheran Social Services is literally acting as an employment agency for the large meat packing companies operating in nearby towns and in need of an abundant supply of cheap labor,” Corcoran said. “Why American union workers don’t get it is beyond me.”

Babin isn’t the only Texas congressman showing concerns for the growing refugee influx into that state.

Rep. Michael McCall, R-Texas, the chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, has also been critical of the refugee resettlement program. He has called two hearings on the national-security risks associated with importing refugees specifically from Syria, which has the highest concentration of jihadists of any country currently involved in the program with the possible exception of Somalia.

Yet, the administration plans to take in thousands from Syria and is continuing to admit about 800 a month from Somalia.

from PropagandaGuard https://propagandaguard.wordpress.com/2015/08/01/bill-launched-to-halt-refugee-resettlement/

from WordPress https://toddmsiebert.wordpress.com/2015/07/31/bill-launched-to-halt-refugee-resettlement/

Classified info in Hillary’s emails likely extensive

Hillary Clinton

In the continuing saga of Hillary Clinton’s controversial email arrangement from her time as secretary of state, more questions have arisen about whether her use of a private email server located in her home in Chappaqua, New York may have led to classified information being left unsecured and possibly compromised.

A new batch of Clinton emails, released by the State Department under a court order to impose transparency on the Obama administration, contains dozens of documents with information redacted and labeled either “confidential” or “sensitive.”

Today the Obama administration slapped a secret designation on a number of these newly-released Clinton’s emails.

Last week, the Wall Street Journal reported at least four of Clinton’s emails from her personal account contained classified information, including some sensitive spy agency secrets, during her time heading the State Department. Government investigators stated unequivocally that those secrets never should have been stored outside of secure government computer systems.

In March, Clinton said at a press conference: “I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material. I’m certainly aware of the classified requirements and did not send classified material.”

However top lawmakers on the House and Senate intelligence committee have been notified in recent days that the extent of classified information on Mrs. Clinton’s private email server was likely far more extensive than the four emails she has publicly acknowledged.

Mrs. Clinton’s campaign said last Friday that any government secrets found on the server had been classified after the fact. But the New York Times reports the inspectors general of the State Department and the nation’s intelligence agencies said the information they found was classified when it was sent and remains so today. Information is considered classified if its disclosure would likely harm national security, and such information can be sent or stored only on computer networks with special safeguards.

According to the Washington Times, “The classifications generally appear to have been done on Thursday, a day ahead of the release, which means the information wasn’t necessarily classified at the time Mrs. Clinton was emailing about it – but has now been deemed too sensitive to put out in public.”

To make sure Hillary’s quotes and lies are not forgotten but come back to haunt her, read Hillary Unhinged: In Her Own Words!

Mrs. Clinton turned over a cache of more than 30,000 emails to the State Department last year, shedding new light on her official communications kept hidden from Congress and the public for years. The emails posted Friday were the third major release from this cache.

As WND reported earlier, Clinton’s emails contained classified material from five different agencies, including the National Security Agency, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency and a spy agency that maps and tracks satellite imagery.

Also included were discussions about the situation in Benghazi, in which terrorists attacked a U.S. facility and killed four Americans.

Other emails revealed that an NBC source was leaking possible questions to Clinton’s Secretary of State’s staff ahead of an appearance on “Meet the Press.”

As WND noted, “She turned over emails to the government after her tenure that she thought appropriate, and deleted those she wanted to delete.”

The Clinton campaign has been engaged in damage control for several days, and public opinion polls indicate voters question her honesty and trustworthiness. As McClatchy reported, “Besieged with questions, [Hillary Clinton] has found herself caught in a murky dispute between State Department and intelligence officials over whether emails on her server were classified.”

The Washington Times confirms the U.S. intelligence community is bracing for the possibility that former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s private email account contains hundreds of revelations of classified information from spy agencies and “is taking steps to contain any damage to national security.”

from PropagandaGuard https://propagandaguard.wordpress.com/2015/08/01/classified-info-in-hillarys-emails-likely-extensive/

from WordPress https://toddmsiebert.wordpress.com/2015/07/31/classified-info-in-hillarys-emails-likely-extensive/

Poll shows Obama would not win 3rd time

In Barack Obama’s mind, he’d been a shoo-in for the Oval Office a third time except for one thing: a constitutional prohibition against him having more than two full terms.

But a poll by Rasmussen Reports on Friday revealed that on this issue, his perception doesn’t align with reality.

It was during a recent visit to Africa he told an audience he is in his second term and loves his work.

“But under our Constitution, I cannot run again,” he said. “I can’t run again. … I think if I ran I could win.”

However, the survey, taken of 1,000 likely voters on Thursday and Friday, said he’d have to figure out how to win with just 30 percent of the vote.

“Most Democrats (57 percent) would vote to give Obama a third term. Ninety-three percent (93 percent) of Republicans, 68 percent of voters not affiliated with either major party – and 32 percent of Democrats – would not,” the poll report said.

The report noted Obama defeated Republican John McCain 53 percent to 46 percent in 2008, and Mitt Romney with 51 percent of the vote in 2012.

All you need to know about the real Obama administration is here, in “The People vs. Barack Obama: The Criminal Case Against the Obama Administration.”

The poll asked “An amendment to the U.S. Constitution prohibits presidential candidates from being elected to more than two four-year terms. Should this amendment be changed so that presidents can serve more than two terms?”

It also asked, “If Barack Obama ran for a third term as president, would you vote for him?”

The results have a sampling error rate of plus or minus three percentage points, with a 95 percent level of confidence.

Rasmussen said, “Nineteen percent of all voters believe that amendment should be changed so presidents can serve longer. Seventy-eight percent oppose such a change.

“Interestingly, only 32 percent of Democrats support changing this amendment. Ninety percent of GOP voters and 82 percent of unaffiliateds are opposed.”

The survey noted that the president’s job approval rating has been in the negative mid-teens recently – as it has been for most of his tenure.

“Majorities of voters across most demographic groups oppose changing the Constitution to allow presidents to serve more than two terms and would not vote for Obama if he ran for a third term. The older the voter, the less likely he or she is to say they would vote for Obama. Most black voters (54 percent), however, would change the constitutional amendment. Just 10 percent of whites and 38 percent of other minority voters agree.”

Rasmussen said, “Sixty-nine percent of black voters would vote to elect Obama to a third term, compared to 22 percent of white voters and 39 percent of other minority voters.”

Also, “Eighty-nine percent of all voters want to continue using the Constitution as the fundamental law of the United States, and 59 percent say legislators should leave it alone. Just over half (51 percent) of voters think Obama has been less faithful to the U.S. Constitution than his predecessors in the Oval Office,” Rasmussen reported.

 

from PropagandaGuard https://propagandaguard.wordpress.com/2015/07/31/poll-shows-obama-would-not-win-3rd-time/

from WordPress https://toddmsiebert.wordpress.com/2015/07/31/poll-shows-obama-would-not-win-3rd-time/

Upcoming Benghazi movie could spell trouble for Hillary

(Fox News) Dana Perino told Megyn Kelly tonight that filmmaker Michael Bay’s much-anticipated movie about the Benghazi terror attack could have a negative impact on Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.

Perino said it’s too early to tell for sure, but she noted that the left is already so worried about the film that they have begun putting resources behind efforts to tear it down.

Perino pointed out that it could showcase that some people believe Clinton is untrustworthy, secretive to a fault and willing to do anything to help herself politically.

from PropagandaGuard https://propagandaguard.wordpress.com/2015/07/31/upcoming-benghazi-movie-could-spell-trouble-for-hillary/

from WordPress https://toddmsiebert.wordpress.com/2015/07/31/upcoming-benghazi-movie-could-spell-trouble-for-hillary/